The war on Venezuela (the war on drugs) (regime change)

Actually you don’t understand the statute.

The President is NOT the one who can declare what is and isn’t a foreign terrorist organization.

He can direct that the process be started (via EO), but the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, is the one who makes the actual designation, and under a very proscribed set of conditions, and he MUST declare his intentions to Congress seven days before it’s done.

And Congress has the power to revoke this designation at any time.

Oh and by the way, designating an organization a foreign terrorist organization STILL does not give the President the authority to kill members of that organization with impunity.

The designation of a group as a foreign terrorist org allows the US to freeze the assets of that org, prosecute anyone that provides that org with material support, and slap immigration restrictions upon known members of the org.

They may use lethal force ONLY when the terrorist org is doing something that will cause an immediate or imminent threat.

It stretches the meanings of these words beyond all credulity to claim a drug boat thousands of miles away is an immediate or imminent threat to the US.

And when engaged in these kinds of operations, the laws of armed conflict prevail, even if a state of war doesn’t exist.

So no, you can’t sink a shipwrecked boat that has survivors hanging off it. That is absolutely an illegal order given to the military that should have been refused.

Hence, Hegseth and Trump setting up Bradley the way they are setting him up…even while praising him, they are set to put the knife in his back.

Meanwhile, the Honduran drug lord who violently trafficked tons and tons of cocaine into America, killing Americans, was released from prison today, after barely showing up for his prison term, his US jury trial conviction wiped away by the Depraved One.

1 Like

Thanks for taking the time to spell that all out.

Look at all the democrats in congress beholden to drug dealers get salty when their cocaine supply gets bombed.

1 Like

No worries. It just got easier to get it through Honduras.
I wonder if the new ‘big guy’ is getting a cut.

Look at MAGAs circling the wagons to defend the US becoming a lawless regime because it jibes with their ridiculous notion of “being manly men”. The rule of law- that’s not for manly men.

Look at Hegseth and Trump suddenly saying “they didn’t know about the second strike”, further tossing Bradley under the bus.

Because “manly men” always make others take the fall for their actions.

2 Likes

The official narrative has “evolved”.

Because the buck will never stop at this administration.

Their little pointy blame finger is out, and Pete is desperate to get the blame away from himself. He didn’t “stay around” it was someone else, anyone else who made the war crime call:

"Hegseth says he did watch the 9/2 boat strike but says he didn’t stay around for the entirety and says it was Adm. Bradley who made call to “sink the boat and eliminate the threat.” “I did not personally see survivors. The thing was on fire…This is called the fog of war.”

Neither Hegseth nor Bradley have anything to fear. You guys are just trying to legitimize your seditious lies. Carry on. We’ll see who ends up in jail first.

2 Likes

The Washington Post article has already been proven to be false. Literally libs circling the wagons around Kelly.

3 Likes

Did he really say that?

What a ■■■■■■■ weasel.

How so?

Who’s Kelly?

Are you sure? From Andrew Napolitano:

“And it gives me no pleasure to say what I’m about to say because I worked with Pete Hegseth for seven or eight years at Fox News. This is an act of a war crime, ordering survivors who the law requires be rescued instead to be murdered. There’s absolutely no legal basis for it,” Napolitano continued, adding:

“Everybody along the line who did it, from the Secretary of Defense to the admiral to the people who actually pulled the trigger should be prosecuted for a war crime for killing these two people.”

“And who would bring that prosecution forward?” Kraisman pressed.

“Military would bring it because they’re all active duty military, not the Secretary of Defense, but everybody else would be subject to a court-martial. I don’t know where this is going to go. Republicans in the Congress seem to be as exasperated by it as the Democrats do. I think it’s getting beyond politics now. The killing is out of hand. And this last one, in which Pete Hegseth first denied that he gave the order, and then the White House said he did give the order, and then the White House said it was in self-defense. Self-defense! You got two people in the ocean clinging to a burning boat to stay alive, and they’re gonna be killed for self-defense? That doesn’t make any sense,” Napolitano fumed.

THE ADMIRAL DID IT!!!

Pete left the room. Fog of war was too much for him. Don’t blame him, last he saw the 2 people were alive. Someone has to take the fall and it will not be this administration. C’mon man.

Yes, I’m sure about that. Might want to check that initial reporting of the incident and their questionable sources.

1 Like

You don’t even understand the phrase.

3 Likes

Didn’t the White House confirm the second strike? How do they justify that? Self-defense?

I cannot support this.

2 Likes

So what if there was a second strike?

You were already there when you approved obama killing United States citizens without a trial.

The second strike killed two people floating helpless in the water which is against the DoD Law of War manual and is a war crime.

It was reported that Hegseth ordered ‘kill them all’ before the strike, which is also against the manual, and is a war crime.

So far, the Post article has been confirmed by the white house except the ‘kill them all’ part, which of course they woudn’t admit to.

Also, Hegseth’s story has changed from ‘I watched it live’ to ‘I ordered the second strike to sink the boat’ to ‘I ordered Bradley to take on the mission and that’s all I did’ to ‘I watched it live, but left before the war crimes part.’.

Why are you defending the killing of two helpless people in the water?